Re: [Wikimedia-l] Welcome messages at arwiki

2017-12-30 Thread Richard Farmbrough
There are many million users registered in central auth.  Most have not
edited anywhere, and never even visited ar.wikipedia.org. welcoming these
is actually harmful in a demonstrable way: readers will be notified of this
useless welcome by email,  or the notification tool. If this were
multiplied across our

On 29 Dec 2017 10:20, "Vi to"  wrote:

> I can estimate the number of welcomes I received to roughly 300, most of
> these languages I cannot even copypaste from.
> While these messages are useless for sure I don't see any reason to be
> bothered of them.
>
> Vito
>
> 2017-12-29 10:25 GMT+01:00 K. Peachey :
>
> > Have you asked the user how the finding the users?
> > Have you considered other steps than just jumping to mailing list?
> > Where are the complaints from the other users to show this is a long
> > running issue?
> >
> > On 29 December 2017 at 19:20, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> > > Users on other projects are complaining about the welcome messages at
> > > arwiki. A bot at that project are welcoming people that has no activity
> > at
> > > that project at all. The bot operator claims the activity is valid,
> but I
> > > can't see that this is a well-behaving bot at all.[1]
> > >
> > > I suspect the bot is welcoming every user it can find, but using user
> > > accounts from central login and not users that has local contributions
> at
> > > arwiki.
> > >
> > > Can someone shut down the bot until the user fix the spam problem.
> > >
> > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Meno25#Welcome_messages
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

2017-10-19 Thread Richard Farmbrough
I think it very clear that these allegations were the last gasp of an
ancient regime, mired as it was in nepotism and other unsavoury practices.

The criminal allegations can be left to the police.  The description of the
steps taken by the WMF in this case seems to be of a very sensible
handlingerie of a difficult situation.

On 20 Oct 2017 12:22 am, "Emeric VALLESPI" 
wrote:

Katherine,

Your answer is particularly shocking. Which right has the Foundation to
feel legitimate in order to describe the situation experienced by Nathalie
Martin or by other people? Only a judge can.
The movement organization does not take precedence over the laws of the
countries.

You rely on a single document (a letter) to judge that there is no moral or
sexual harassment?
What about the criminal complaint? And the medical leaves? And the
testimonies attached to the complaint? These other elements were not taken
into account, why?

The Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation ridiculed himself in the press [0]
when he said that he had discovered yesterday the reproaches that were
addressed to him as well as the complaint. His lawyer even tried to make it
appear that the complaint had never been filed.
Even though this whole situation has been known by the Wikimedia Foundation
for months!

Mockery reaches its top with your so-called measures. In case you do not
know Katherine, in France independent lawyers do not exist. Judges are
independent, not lawyers.
The lawyers you have appointed have been paid by the Foundation. They
*only* interviewed the defendant. In these conditions, how could the
outcome not be favorable to his version?

You did not answer any of my previous questions:

Why did not the Wikimedia Foundation hear Nathalie Martin at her request?
Just to have her version of the facts, it would have been - maybe ... - a
good idea.
Why did the experts who were supposed to conduct an adversarial
investigation not discussed with Nathalie or Marie-Alice? Would not that
have been the least of the things? Why did not they hear the board of
trustees’ member? Why did you refuse to organize, as you (or your
representatives) were offered, a confrontation between
complainant/defendant?
Why fear so much to hear the version of Nathalie?

You have witnessed what Marie-Alice and Nathalie have experienced with
social media as well as on the mailing-list you're hosting. You've done
absolutely nothing to protect them.
You're mentioning complaints that have been filed to the Support and Safety
committee, which has no legal existence in the real world (outside of the
movement). I am talking about real criminal complaints in a police station.
Whether you can compare the two shows your total unconsciousness.

Again, the role of the Wikimedia Foundation is not to determine whether the
current Chair is guilty or innocent. Nor whether the acts are sexual or
moral harassment.
Your role, as an organization, is, to a minimum, to hear the victims and to
ensure their protection. You have undertaken everything to mask this
situation in order to guarantee your tranquility. It is a shame for a
movement that wants to be humanistic.

Regards,
--
Emeric Vallespi

2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher :

> Everyone,
>
> The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our
> community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or
> ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take all
> harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the
> appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My goal
here
> today is to provide more information about the actions of the Wikimedia
> Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in which
> our movement finds itself.
>
> As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the
French
> Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies, and the
> Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia
> France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a number
of
> the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French
> Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the French
> community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and concerned
> Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by
> community members[1] and in the press.[2] Over the past months the
> Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging harassment
> and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies
> whenever applicable.
>
> Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an essay
> about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared that
> essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning
> allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling claims
> of the recent essay—those regarding the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Attribution of external content

2017-08-29 Thread Richard Farmbrough
We have a number of source specific templates, such  as {{EB1911}} for
acknowledging re-used source material.  There is as yet no automatic
 mechanism for changing these as and when the actual copying is replaced
entirely.

On 28 Aug 2017 01:18, "Gnangarra"  wrote:

> but the information is exactly the same, url, date, author, title - the
> refn template can include anything you need to add including license detail
> ie cc-by all of which can be internal or external links
>
> On 28 August 2017 at 00:26, John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > Citation and reuse is two different things.
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> >
> > > that notice states that text has been used, a specific citation where
> the
> > > text would add context by using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> > > Template:Refn
> > >
> > > On 27 August 2017 at 22:22, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Use of a template does not accurately identify the copied text, and
> in
> > > this
> > > > case nor the author.
> > > >
> > > > The license is the contract with the author and the reason why the
> text
> > > can
> > > > be copied. If the license says the author shall be identified, the by
> > > > attribution clause, then a link to the site is not good enough. If
> the
> > > > share alike clause is given, then it is even harder to give correct
> > > credit,
> > > > as the request for credit can be pretty weird.
> > > >
> > > > Anyhow, a page that is later edited is not necessarily something the
> > > > external editor has created, he or she has created a part that at
> some
> > > > point in time was incorporated in the page, and the present page may
> > not
> > > > even contain this content anymore.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Gnangarra 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > There is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:CC-notice on en at
> > > least
> > > > > specifically for the purpose of incorporating text licensed cc-by
> > > content
> > > > > within articles
> > > > >
> > > > > On 27 August 2017 at 21:28, John Erling Blad 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In some cases we need to attribute content created on external
> > sites,
> > > > and
> > > > > > reused on Wikimedia-sites. In Norway Åndsverksloven says "The
> > creator
> > > > has
> > > > > > the right to be named according to good practice" ("Opphavsmannen
> > har
> > > > > krav
> > > > > > på å bli navngitt slik som god skikk tilsier") and for our
> content
> > > that
> > > > > is
> > > > > > given by our license and our terms of use. That means by a link
> to
> > > the
> > > > > page
> > > > > > if possible, or if possible an entry in the history.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now we use a template on the page itself, or similar, but it is
> not
> > > the
> > > > > > page on our site that the external entity has provided, they have
> > > > > provided
> > > > > > the content at their site. So we must say that in some consistent
> > > way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that the best option would be to have a log entry
> > injected
> > > > into
> > > > > > the history for our page that says "this revision comes in full
> or
> > > part
> > > > > > from that external source". Such an entry could be made by the
> > editor
> > > > or
> > > > > by
> > > > > > an administrator, but must be made as an extension of the
> revision.
> > > It
> > > > > > should also be possible to delete such an entry.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > An alternative could be to make the summary editable, but the
> > summary
> > > > is
> > > > > > the description of the revision, not the source of the revision.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does this make sense? Will it solve the problem, or is it just
> > > another
> > > > > > level that makes things more confusing?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > John Erling Blad
> > > > > > ___
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > >  > unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > GN.
> > > > > President Wikimedia Australia
> > > > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > > > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

2017-08-25 Thread Richard Farmbrough
While I would  (and have) strongly opposed both threats and actual
contacting of employerst of volunteers, I think the situation here is
somewhat different.

Firstly WMF employees are not subject to community sanction insofar as
their paid roles go.  Secondly it is perfectlying normal to have an
escalation path in case of difficulty in anthe public faxing role.

I am aware that the US has a culture far more prone to fire people first
and ask questions later, than the UK, but I would hope that the WMF does
not work like that.

On 25 Aug 2017 19:23, "Andrew Lih"  wrote:

> I'd like to second what Rob has expressed here. This list already suffers a
> very poor reputation within our community, even as it is positioned as an
> important part of our communications ecosystem.
>
> Allowing participants to intimidate others and exact "in real life"
> consequences should be dealt with in the most severe manner. If we do
> not meatball:DefendEachOther, and deliver the basic safety needs of the
> list membership, how can we in good conscience keep this list running and
> encourage participation?
>
> -Andrew
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Robert Fernandez  >
> wrote:
>
> > I am grateful that the moderators have taken some action, but I am
> > disappointed that contacting a person's employer is not yet seen as an
> > uncrossable line here.
> >
> > Out of respect to your call for civility I will refrain from directly
> > responding to the person in question despite his allegations against me.
> > It is a mistake to frame this as a free speech issue.  It is of course in
> > the interests of a person engaging in bullying and harassing behavior to
> > claim people are trying to suppress their powerful truths, but there is
> no
> > reason we have to accept this duplicitous framing.  The content of the
> > message is immaterial, the behavior is the issue.  Some people may see
> this
> > as a grey area given that it was a Foundation employee, but I see it as a
> > slippery slope.  Seddon's job is almost certainly safe, but this might
> not
> > be the case for the next victim.  Will the poster in question decide
> that I
> > am "bullying and harassing" him and attempt to contact my employer next?
> >
> > Most of my fellow board members of my chapter are the employees of US
> > government agencies or connected to the Foundation as an employee or a
> > grant recipient.   Given the unusual political climate in the US I worry
> > that the former group are particularly vulnerable to harassment targeting
> > their employment.   (Media outlets favored by the current US presidential
> > administration have targeted individual Wikimedia editors, including
> > myself, in the past.)  If participants on this list are allowed to engage
> > in this sort of harassment without real consequence, I will advise that
> my
> > chapter and its board members and volunteers no longer participate on
> this
> > list due to the risk to their livelihoods.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 5:45 AM, Shani Evenstein 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Wikimedia-l,
> > >
> > > Rogol has been placed under moderation, but at this point no decision
> has
> > > been made to ban him from the list. As long as his messages are
> > reasonable,
> > > respectful and on point, his messages will go through. We agreed that
> it
> > is
> > > important to allow a diversity of voices to be heard, including those
> of
> > > "frequent flyers" in the list, especially as we work collaboratively on
> > > next steps towards a healthier community atmosphere.
> > >
> > > In addition, we are asking everyone to refrain from focusing on
> specific
> > > individuals posting to the list, put any personal issues aside and stay
> > on
> > > problem. We want as many people as possible to productively and
> > objectively
> > > participate in the discussion, till we draft clearer guidelines for
> > posting
> > > to the list. We are aware that these guidelines will not automagically
> > fix
> > > all of our issues as a global community, but we believe they will help
> > > reduce the noise substantially. Do keep on debating. We are trying to
> > > intervene as little as possible at this point and let the debate run
> its
> > > course.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Shani Evenstein, on behalf of the Wikimedia-l Admins.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 8:52 PM, James Salsman 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Why are we having this RFC prior to the survey which was discussed at
> > >> length less than a year ago?
> > >>
> > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_Salsman#Peri
> > >> odic_survey_prototype
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Robert Fernandez
> > >>  wrote:
> > >> > Since Rogol has followed through on his threat he should be banned
> > from
> > >> the
> > >> > list, or we should have a public statement from the moderators
> > regarding
> > >> > why they will 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Windows 10 lockscreen images

2017-08-23 Thread Richard Farmbrough
I have looked at the Wikipedia traffic for the places associated with some
of these images, and it is clear that they drive in the order of thousands
of hits per day.

I haven't been able to find a definitive list, from which more
comprehensive stats could be generated.

I think that using Commons images might provide an attribution problem.  It
might also take bread from the mouth of babes  (or at least photographers).
I think Microsoft can afford to pay for these images and fund creation of
more, even if that is mainly going to be commercial, it is not inimical to
free images.


On 21 Aug 2017 18:20, "Michael Maggs"  wrote:

> Rogol
>
> Why the randomly-chosen names beginning with R?
>
> Michael
>
>
> Rogol Domedonfors wrote:
>
>> Perhaps a randomly chosen image every time the user logs in?
>>
>> Rudigerd
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak
>> wrote:
>>
>> it does not hurt to ask - Microsoft does some CSR, after all, and using
>>> beautiful images under an open license is in their interest, too anyway.
>>> I
>>> would not be overly optimistic though.
>>>
>>> dj
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Tomasz Ganicz
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> In some geographies this feature is used as an advertising tool - I guess
 promoting of Commons via this feature could be quite costly.

 2017-08-20 1:08 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett:

 Those of you running Windows 10 will be familiar with the
> regularly-changing "lockscreen" images showing things like beautiful
> scenery and scenes from nature:
>
>  https://www.tekrevue.com/tip/find-windows-spotlight-lock-
> screen-images-windows-10/
>
> The last one I just saw was labelled "copyright [photographer name]
> and Shutterstock"
>
> Is there someone at WMF, with contacts at Microsoft, who could
> persuade them to use some featured images from Commons, with a small
> piece of text explaining that people may upload their own images?
>
> That would seem to be a simple way to do a massive piece of outreach,
> to a new audience.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>


 --
 Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
 http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
 http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
 wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
 wiki/Wikimedia-l
 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 

>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> __
>>>
>>>   prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
>>> kierownik katedry MINDS (Management in Networked and Digital Societies)
>>> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
>>> http://NeRDS.kozminski.edu.pl
>>>
>>> associate faculty w Berkman-Klein Center for Internet and Society,
>>> Harvard University
>>>
>>> Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
>>> Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University
>>> Press) mojego autorstwa (Dorothy Lee Award 2015, Nagroda
>>> Naukowa Prezesa PAN 2016)  http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> 
>>>
>>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,> ilto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Probably that is verifiability.

On 11 Aug 2017 12:31, "Rogol Domedonfors" <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm aware that "knowledge" as a concept has a long history.  I would not
> have expected the movement to have finally resolved the "problem of
> knowledge", whatever that might be, nor did I say that I had.  I am
> expressing surprise that there is not yet a common understanding that the
> movement can rally round.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Richard Farmbrough <
> rich...@farmbrough.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > The problem of knowledge is much older than Wikipedia.  It is part of the
> > reason that so many intelligent people belive things that are "simply not
> > so".
> >
> >
> > On 11 Aug 2017 11:52, "Rogol Domedonfors" <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Is it not rather late to be discussing what "knowledge" might be,
> towards
> > > the end of the second decade of a mission to bring the sum of human
> > > knowledge to the world, and in the middle of a major effort to
> determine
> > > the strategy of the movement into its third and fourth decades?  Surely
> > by
> > > now there is a clear, concise and actionable agreed definition of
> > knowledge
> > > that we can point to when people ask what all that money has been and
> > > continues to be raised for?  Why not just point to that common position
> > > that everyone has signed up to?
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 1:00 PM, John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Information is "facts told, heard, or discovered" (Oxford) or
> > "knowledge
> > > > communicated or received concerning a particular fact or
> circumstance".
> > > (I
> > > > would say data and not knowledge, but knowledge is good enough for
> > this.)
> > > > If you can't observe the fact or circumstance, and can't communicate
> > the
> > > > fact, how can there be the information?
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, this does not make sense.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:08 AM, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ​
> > > > > > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ​very agree, the intangible sources are a really challenge to way
> you
> > > > look
> > > > > at verifiability. Not only are wanting to gather the information
> and
> > > make
> > > > > it possible for others to also access it the very nature of the
> > sources
> > > > is
> > > > > dynamic and fragile bringing them into a tangible format risks the
> > > > > continuation of knowledge gained, a kin to exposing an ancient
> paper
> > > > source
> > > > > to intense UV light.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is a lot of fantastic work going on around the world on how
> to
> > > > > "Europeanise" knowledge without destroying it  .  All of this gets
> > more
> > > > > complex when you learn that knowledge isnt just a few words its
> part
> > > of a
> > > > > multidimensional connection to and in time, place, and
> circumstances
> > > by
> > > > > bringing it into a one dimensional world like Wikipedia is in it
> self
> > > > > changing the very nature of the knowledge.   If our goal is to
> > collect
> > > > the
> > > > > sum of all knowledge then we need to be free as communities to
> > address
> > > > the
> > > > > uniqueness of the knowledge we seek within the bounds of
> > > > culture(language)
> > > > > from which it originates
> > > > >
> > > > > > ​
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 9 August 2017 at 04:12, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> > jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > JP
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, 05:20 John Erling Blad, <jeb...@gmail.com>
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread Richard Farmbrough
The problem of knowledge is much older than Wikipedia.  It is part of the
reason that so many intelligent people belive things that are "simply not
so".


On 11 Aug 2017 11:52, "Rogol Domedonfors"  wrote:

> Is it not rather late to be discussing what "knowledge" might be, towards
> the end of the second decade of a mission to bring the sum of human
> knowledge to the world, and in the middle of a major effort to determine
> the strategy of the movement into its third and fourth decades?  Surely by
> now there is a clear, concise and actionable agreed definition of knowledge
> that we can point to when people ask what all that money has been and
> continues to be raised for?  Why not just point to that common position
> that everyone has signed up to?
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 1:00 PM, John Erling Blad 
> wrote:
>
> > Information is "facts told, heard, or discovered" (Oxford) or "knowledge
> > communicated or received concerning a particular fact or circumstance".
> (I
> > would say data and not knowledge, but knowledge is good enough for this.)
> > If you can't observe the fact or circumstance, and can't communicate the
> > fact, how can there be the information?
> >
> > Sorry, this does not make sense.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:08 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > ​
> > > > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources
> > >
> > >
> > > ​very agree, the intangible sources are a really challenge to way you
> > look
> > > at verifiability. Not only are wanting to gather the information and
> make
> > > it possible for others to also access it the very nature of the sources
> > is
> > > dynamic and fragile bringing them into a tangible format risks the
> > > continuation of knowledge gained, a kin to exposing an ancient paper
> > source
> > > to intense UV light.
> > >
> > > There is a lot of fantastic work going on around the world on how to
> > > "Europeanise" knowledge without destroying it  .  All of this gets more
> > > complex when you learn that knowledge isnt just a few words its part
> of a
> > > multidimensional connection to and in time, place, and circumstances
> by
> > > bringing it into a one dimensional world like Wikipedia is in it self
> > > changing the very nature of the knowledge.   If our goal is to collect
> > the
> > > sum of all knowledge then we need to be free as communities to address
> > the
> > > uniqueness of the knowledge we seek within the bounds of
> > culture(language)
> > > from which it originates
> > >
> > > > ​
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9 August 2017 at 04:12, Jean-Philippe Béland  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources.
> > > >
> > > > JP
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, 05:20 John Erling Blad, 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Policy should not have local variations, unless you want to create
> > > > > something different from Wikipedia. This is about core content
> > > policies.
> > > > > Those are no original research, verifiability, and neutral point of
> > > view.
> > > > > The one most don't follow is neutral point of view, where projects
> > > > rewrite
> > > > > world history to focus on their own local view.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Gnangarra 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > its the cultural differences that influence the policy, so who's
> > > > culture
> > > > > is
> > > > > > more significant than everyone elses that will dictate the
> > policies.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8 August 2017 at 08:14, John Erling Blad 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes there are cultural differences between wikipedias on
> > _content_,
> > > > but
> > > > > > > there should be no differences on _policy_ about that content.
> > > > > > > Note also that there are some differences on use of _facts_
> that
> > > are
> > > > > > highly
> > > > > > > troublesome, and that comes from relaxed core policies.
> > > > > > > Armenian genocide for example.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Gnangarra  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > to quote, worth a read before even considering policies being
> > > > global
> > > > > > > > http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23901/
> abstract
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This article explores the relationship between linguistic
> > culture
> > > > and
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > preferred standards of presenting information based on
> > article
> > > > > > > > > representation in major Wikipedias. Using primary research
> > > > analysis
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > number of images, references, internal links, external
> links,
> > > > > words,
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > characters, as well as their proportions in Good and
> Featured
> > > > > > articles
> > > > > > > on
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Which templates should be global?

2017-06-28 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Amir, I will certainly  try to respond!  I had a rather nice universal
deployment model pre-lua.

On 28 Jun 2017 07:33, "Amir E. Aharoni" 
wrote:

> Hallo,
>
> TLDR: If you are an experienced editor on any Wikimedia project in any
> language, please add your ideas here:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Which_templates_should_be_global
>
> In more detail:
>
> Continuing some recent discussions from Phabricator[1], Wikimedia
> Hackathon, and Wikimedia Developers Summit, I'd like to ask the wider
> community of editors in all projects:
>
> Which templates could be useful for all Wikimedia projects, or at least for
> _many_ projects?
>
> A lot of templates are replicated manually, and it's a problem that is
> well-known to all experienced editors. If there was a technology that
> allows templates to be more conveniently globally managed, which templates
> would you adapt to this technology first?
>
> I started a list at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Which_templates_should_be_global . Please
> continue it! I'm very interested to hear from all projects and languages,
> not only the big Wikipedias, so spread the word.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1] For example https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T159334
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] WFM 91.7 FM becomes our broadcasting partner in Nigeria

2017-06-12 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Article needate a little work.

On 12 Jun 2017 12:23, "Quim Gil"  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:26 PM, shola ishola 
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Dear wikipedians,
> >
> > We are delighted to announce that we have reached agreement with the
> above
> > named prestigious broadcasting station to partner with us in reaching
> > further audience in Nigeria.
> >
> > The agreement will assist us in reaching wider audience and also
> > actualizing some of our core projects in alignment with the pinnacle of
> > their establishment, which is to promote women in Nigeria.
> >
> > I will keep you inform as things unfold.
> > Best RegardsOlushola
> > Welcome to WFM 91.7 - NIGERIA'S FIRST RADIO STATION FOR WOMEN AND THEIR
> > FAMILIES
> >
> > |
> > |   |
> > Welcome to WFM 91.7 - NIGERIA'S FIRST RADIO STATION FOR WOMEN AND THEIR
> > FAMILIES
> >  Keeping listeners company throughout the day with quality, relevant,
> > informative and entertaining programmes tha...  |  |
> >
>
> This very interesting announcement was kind of cut. Turns out WFM 91.7 has
> an informative article in English Wikipedia:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WFM_91.7
>
> Thank you Shola and other contributors of Nigeria for this fresh
> initiative! Please report about your progress.
>
> --
> Quim Gil
> Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia

2017-04-29 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Primarily this is those who sign the statement  on meta.

On 29 Apr 2017 20:41, "Rogol Domedonfors" <domedonf...@gmail.com> wrote:

> James
>
> If you cannot say who "We" are who do not support terrorism, then your
> statement is both meaningless and ineffectual.  If you are specific, then
> "we" need to know why you feel able to speak for "us".
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 8:33 PM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > @ Richard Thank you. I have adjusted that sentence to "We do not support
> > terrorism."
> >
> > J
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Richard Farmbrough <
> > rich...@farmbrough.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > "As a movement" is a phrase which I have trouble with.  WhiIe left it
> is
> > > very easy to make apple pie statements with little fear of
> > contradiction, I
> > > think it misees the point.  We provide information, neutral
> information.
> > > Perhaps we hope as individuals this discourages rather than encourages
> > > certain forms of behaviour. But if we provided the information with the
> > > goal of, for example, opposing terrorism we would cease to be a
> neutral,
> > > reliable sourgent,  thus defeating any such goal.
> > >
> > > Conversely it is far more convincing to say that we don't support
> > > terrorism, that the statements are on their face absurd, that we
> clearly
> > > document the rise and fall of Isis, together with their actions both in
> > the
> > > Middle East and the wider world, and tother encourage anyone who doubts
> > > this to read our articles on the subject.
> > >
> > > On 29 Apr 2017 19:52, "James Heilman" <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Richard I am not sure I am clear on what you mean. We are not
> impartial
> > > to
> > > > everything. We oppose censorship and we oppose suppression of freedom
> > of
> > > > information. I think it is also perfectly fine to state that we as a
> > > > movement oppose terrorism.
> > > >
> > > > Made a few more adjustments to this statement on meta
> > > >
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Response_to_2017_ban_in_Turkey
> > > >
> > > > James
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Richard Farmbrough <
> > > > rich...@farmbrough.co.uk> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > It is absolutely important to be clear that Wikipedia is impartial,
> > or
> > > at
> > > > > least  substantially so.  This impartiality may be a threat to
> some,
> > > but
> > > > it
> > > > > could be counter-productive to make statements which are not
> > carefully
> > > > > thought through.  Those who support repressive regimes can easily
> be
> > > > pushed
> > > > > into an absolutist mindset.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 29 Apr 2017 18:42, "Ivan Martínez" <gala...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 to Ting's idea about a statement
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also we can support from our corner sending tweets and e-mails to
> > our
> > > > > local
> > > > > > embassies. Our friends from Turkey or someone who speaks turkish
> > can
> > > > > > support us with a hasthag? I posted #WikipediaSansürlendi but
> maybe
> > > is
> > > > > > incorrect.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2017-04-29 12:16 GMT-05:00 Ting Chen <wing.phil...@gmx.de>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think the Foundation and the chapters *must* make a statement
> > > that
> > > > > > > decisively contradicts the reason of the block: That Wikipedia
> > > > supports
> > > > > > > terrorism. There could be further texts in the statement which
> > > > stresses
> > > > > > our
> > > > > > > principle of neutrality and our goal to spread knowledge, but
> the
> > > > first
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > most important statement is to contradict the accusation.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ah some times I miss Jay, he would immedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia

2017-04-29 Thread Richard Farmbrough
"As a movement" is a phrase which I have trouble with.  WhiIe left it is
very easy to make apple pie statements with little fear of contradiction, I
think it misees the point.  We provide information, neutral information.
Perhaps we hope as individuals this discourages rather than encourages
certain forms of behaviour. But if we provided the information with the
goal of, for example, opposing terrorism we would cease to be a neutral,
reliable sourgent,  thus defeating any such goal.

Conversely it is far more convincing to say that we don't support
terrorism, that the statements are on their face absurd, that we clearly
document the rise and fall of Isis, together with their actions both in the
Middle East and the wider world, and tother encourage anyone who doubts
this to read our articles on the subject.

On 29 Apr 2017 19:52, "James Heilman" <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Richard I am not sure I am clear on what you mean. We are not impartial to
> everything. We oppose censorship and we oppose suppression of freedom of
> information. I think it is also perfectly fine to state that we as a
> movement oppose terrorism.
>
> Made a few more adjustments to this statement on meta
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Response_to_2017_ban_in_Turkey
>
> James
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Richard Farmbrough <
> rich...@farmbrough.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > It is absolutely important to be clear that Wikipedia is impartial, or at
> > least  substantially so.  This impartiality may be a threat to some, but
> it
> > could be counter-productive to make statements which are not carefully
> > thought through.  Those who support repressive regimes can easily be
> pushed
> > into an absolutist mindset.
> >
> >
> > On 29 Apr 2017 18:42, "Ivan Martínez" <gala...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 to Ting's idea about a statement
> > >
> > > Also we can support from our corner sending tweets and e-mails to our
> > local
> > > embassies. Our friends from Turkey or someone who speaks turkish can
> > > support us with a hasthag? I posted #WikipediaSansürlendi but maybe is
> > > incorrect.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > 2017-04-29 12:16 GMT-05:00 Ting Chen <wing.phil...@gmx.de>:
> > >
> > > > I think the Foundation and the chapters *must* make a statement that
> > > > decisively contradicts the reason of the block: That Wikipedia
> supports
> > > > terrorism. There could be further texts in the statement which
> stresses
> > > our
> > > > principle of neutrality and our goal to spread knowledge, but the
> first
> > > and
> > > > most important statement is to contradict the accusation.
> > > >
> > > > Ah some times I miss Jay, he would immediately recognize how
> important
> > it
> > > > is to make such a statement. When national newspapers and broadcasts
> > are
> > > > referring (I just heard the one in Deutschland Funk
> > > > http://www.deutschlandfunk.de/dlf24-startseite.1441.de.html ) this
> > > event,
> > > > there should be not only the accusation but always also a reaction.
> > > >
> > > > Greetings
> > > >
> > > > Ting
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am 29.04.2017 um 10:43 schrieb Itzik - Wikimedia Israel:
> > > >
> > > >> Hey,
> > > >>
> > > >> FYI -  sad news from Turkish.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> > > >> Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> > > >> +972-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> > > >> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share
> in
> > > the
> > > >> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> -- Forwarded message --
> > > >> From: Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <it...@wikimedia.org.il>
> > > >> Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:42 AM
> > > >> Subject: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia
> > > >> To: Communications Committee <wmfc...@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39754909
> > > >>
> > > >> Reuters just published that a 15 minutes ago, so it will be soon all
> > > over
> > > >> the news.
> > > >>
> > > &g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia

2017-04-29 Thread Richard Farmbrough
It is absolutely important to be clear that Wikipedia is impartial, or at
least  substantially so.  This impartiality may be a threat to some, but it
could be counter-productive to make statements which are not carefully
thought through.  Those who support repressive regimes can easily be pushed
into an absolutist mindset.


On 29 Apr 2017 18:42, "Ivan Martínez"  wrote:

> +1 to Ting's idea about a statement
>
> Also we can support from our corner sending tweets and e-mails to our local
> embassies. Our friends from Turkey or someone who speaks turkish can
> support us with a hasthag? I posted #WikipediaSansürlendi but maybe is
> incorrect.
>
> Best,
>
> 2017-04-29 12:16 GMT-05:00 Ting Chen :
>
> > I think the Foundation and the chapters *must* make a statement that
> > decisively contradicts the reason of the block: That Wikipedia supports
> > terrorism. There could be further texts in the statement which stresses
> our
> > principle of neutrality and our goal to spread knowledge, but the first
> and
> > most important statement is to contradict the accusation.
> >
> > Ah some times I miss Jay, he would immediately recognize how important it
> > is to make such a statement. When national newspapers and broadcasts are
> > referring (I just heard the one in Deutschland Funk
> > http://www.deutschlandfunk.de/dlf24-startseite.1441.de.html ) this
> event,
> > there should be not only the accusation but always also a reaction.
> >
> > Greetings
> >
> > Ting
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 29.04.2017 um 10:43 schrieb Itzik - Wikimedia Israel:
> >
> >> Hey,
> >>
> >> FYI -  sad news from Turkish.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> >> Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> >> +972-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> >> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the
> >> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
> >>
> >>
> >> -- Forwarded message --
> >> From: Itzik - Wikimedia Israel 
> >> Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:42 AM
> >> Subject: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia
> >> To: Communications Committee 
> >>
> >>
> >> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39754909
> >>
> >> Reuters just published that a 15 minutes ago, so it will be soon all
> over
> >> the news.
> >>
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> *Turkey has blocked all access inside the country to the online
> >> encyclopaedia Wikipedia, one of the world's most popular websites.*
> >>
> >> It was not initially clear why the ban had been imposed.
> >> The Turkey Blocks group said the site was inaccessible from 08:00 (05:00
> >> GMT) by order of the Turkish authorities.
> >> People in the capital Istanbul were unable to access any Wikipedia pages
> >> without using a Virtual Private Network (VPN).
> >> "After technical analysis and legal consideration based on the Law Nr.
> >> 5651, an administrative measure has been taken for this website,"
> Turkey's
> >> Information and Communication Technologies Authority was quoted as
> saying.
> >> No reason was given.
> >> Turkey Blocks and Turkish media, including the Hurriyet Daily News, said
> >> the provisional order would need to be backed by a full court ruling in
> >> the
> >> next few days.
> >>
> >> Social media was in uproar as news of the ban emerged, with some users
> >> speculating that it might be a bid to suppress criticism on President
> >> Recep
> >> Tayyip Erdogan's Wikipedia page.
> >> Mr Erdogan narrowly won a controversial 16 April referendum on
> increasing
> >> his powers, but the issue has deeply divided the country.
> >> Turkey has temporarily blocked popular social media sites including
> >> Facebook and Twitter in the past, especially in the wake of mass
> protests
> >> or terror attacks.
> >> The government has previously denied censoring the internet, blaming
> >> outages on spikes in usage after major events.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> >> Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> >> +972-54-5878078 <+972%2054-587-8078> | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> >> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the
> >> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> i/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> 
> >>
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FLOSS for operations equipment

2016-03-22 Thread Richard Farmbrough

I think there are two clear policies here:

1. The forkability of the projects
2. The "niceness" of suppliers.

The first is a movement and project principle.  The second is - loosely 
- connected to a broader movement.  It is philosophically and morally 
dubious to coerce people to conform to our preferred ethics model.  
Perhaps this would be highlighted best if we were to consider only 
serving web pages to readers using FLOSS operating systems.






___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Scholarship Decline

2016-03-22 Thread Richard Farmbrough
I believe that Wikimania scholarships are one of the best uses of WMF 
funds.  I would like to see more scholarships.  If funds are a problem, 
then by all means have more scholarships for relatively local people - 
but frankly I don't think funds _are_ a problem.


On 21/03/2016 14:00, Rodrigo Padula wrote:

I had a conversation with Vitor Mazuco about this email and agreed with his 
point of view.

Analyzing the list of users from Brazil that received schollarships from WMF 
during the last years, I noted that WMF/Scholarship Committees are always 
supporting the same group of people not generating opportunities for new 
people(and very important contributors) to join and enjoy Wikimania.

Including, some of the users that received support to go to Wikimania never 
provided any feedback to our community regarding Wikimania experience, 
learnings, knowledge acquired or any kind of reports.

I think the scholarship committee should take in consideration those who have 
been to the event several times, so that we can also include more people, 
increasing the Wikimania's diversity in all possible ways, avoid so many 
repetitions engaging more people into this international movement.

I'm not saying that the users that received support in recent years do not 
deserve this support, my point is that we have more people who also deserve to 
go to Wikimania and never get this opportunity, sometimes it disengage our 
volunteers.

Rodrigo Padula
Coordenador de Projetos
Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa
http://www.wikimedia.org.br
21 99326-0558


--- Em Qui, 17 Mar 2016 20:32:36 -0300 Ellie Young eyo...@wikimedia.org 
escreveu 
Vitor,

I have asked the Scholarship Committee for Wikimania '16 to reply to your
email.
wikimania-scholarsh...@wikimedia.org

Ellie Young
WMF Events Manager


On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Vitor Mazuco vitor.maz...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hi everybody!

 my apply was decline.

 This is my second time that is decline, and my friend of Brazil goes
 every year, same users in every year and I never.

 If do you compare my contribution as long with their, I have much more
 and my apply is every year decline by WMF.

 Please, who can help with this?

 Thanks in advanced,

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe;




-
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe;



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reducing the net cost of Wikimania

2016-02-19 Thread Richard Farmbrough
It's all very well to assume that certain demographics are wealthy. But 
it is simply a stereotype. Wikipedians I know personally from the 
"privileged" demographics vary from those who are well off through to 
those who are saddled with substantial debt and zero income.


But really the question is, given the funds available, and the benefits 
that accrue, why there should be such a limited WMF spend on Wikimania 
(and/or other gatherings).   It is one of the few discretionary spends 
that we know from stories like Doc James' has a huge impact.


On 10/02/2016 16:27, Béria Lima wrote:
And I for one agree with the new policy. The effort made by a European 
(or American, or Canadian) to travel to a Wikimania, is something like 
one month of salary. For a woman from the same place will probably be 
2 months (pay gap at its finest!) and for a Latino, African, or 
Asiatic the effort starts at 6 months and go on to even a decade*[4]* 
(A full decade of your salary to go to Wikimania).



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

2015-08-24 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Thanks for the (single) use case: Trouble is it just  pushes the 
question further down the road.


inadequate for some compelling reason 

On 13/08/2015 09:25, Pine W wrote:

A*few*  legitimate use cases could be:

*Superprotection by stewards of legally or technically sensitive pages, to
prevent damage caused by a hijacked admin account. The theory here is that
admin accounts are more numerous than steward accounts, so the liklihood of
a successful admin account hijack may be higher. Superprotection would
proactively limit possible damage. Admins doing routine maintenance work,
or taking actions with community consent, could simply make a request for a
temporary lift of superprotect by a steward or ask a steward to make an
edit themselves.

*Upon community request, superprotection of pages by a steward where those
pages are the subject of wheel-warring among local admins.

*Superprotection of a page by a steward for legal reasons at the request of
WMF Legal, for example if a page is the subject of a legal dispute and
normal full protection is inadequate for some  compelling reason.

None of this is an endorsement of WMF's first use of superprotect. I would
prefer that if superprotect continues to exist as a tool, that it be in the
hands of the stewards and not WMF directly.

Pine



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

2015-08-24 Thread Richard Farmbrough

Not a good example.   This could be a special page.

On 11/08/2015 21:56, Risker wrote:

There are situations where not even the administrators of a particular
community should be allowed to edit a page. A good example would be the
pages that describe the copyright and licensing of Wikimedia products.
Individual communities cannot change that (it applies globally), and
individual administrators should not modify it. If there is a problem with
translation, that needs to be brought to the attention of the WMF, because
there may be a similar problem with translation elsewhere.

There are also some examples currently being discussed on the Wikitech-L
list that may require significantly elevated levels of protection above
'all administrators on Project ABC', although they may call for another
level of protection that can be customizable to allowing a much smaller
group or specific individuals to be the only editors.

Risker/Anne




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

2015-08-24 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Using it for legal disputes is poor form.  We had legal disputes before, 
and managed them with office actions.  If you don't trust the admins 
not to  purposefully post libel or copyvios, then super-protecting a 
page or two won't help.


Moreover it implies that the Foundation can or will take action in these 
matters to override the community, which opens them up to charges of 
discrimination, favouritism, nepotism, cowardice, corruption or at least 
stupidity.



On 11/08/2015 19:36, John Lewis wrote:
Yes. It was used a few months ago to prevent editing the Germany item 
on Wikidata due to a very serious breaking issue. Also on several 
pages following legal disputes. Superprotect in my opinion if used 
correctly is an essential tool which can prevent legal and technical 
issues that can in theory cause wide disruption. John 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

2015-08-24 Thread Richard Farmbrough
No community would want to change documents issued by the WMF, if it 
did, the stewards would be crazy to do so.


This is reaching.

Why?

On 11/08/2015 22:34, Risker wrote:

However, stewards under their current
process could very well find themselves in a situation where a community
wants to do something, like change the (global) terms of use or the
(global) interpretation of copyright policyat which point their current
rules put them smack in the middle of the global community and WMF board
that approved a global policy, and a local community that wants to have its
own.



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What is the wikipedia http API address now?

2015-06-20 Thread Richard Farmbrough
All on-wiki discussion agrees that the http service has been
unceremoniously dumped.  Various reasons are given: HSTS won't allow you to
access it (not quite true) and that it would allow SSL Stripping attacks
(almost totally false).



On 20 June 2015 at 13:43, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjor...@wikimedia.org
wrote:

 On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Yuri y...@rawbw.com wrote:

  Now all previously http URLs redirect to https.
  https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Main_page also still mentions the old
  http address that now redirects.
 
  What is the new purely http API address?
 

 I don't think there is one.

 --
 Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
 Software Engineer
 Wikimedia Foundation
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Printed Wikipedia is go!

2015-06-20 Thread Richard Farmbrough
I toyed with this idea some years ago when I was working for a short-run
large-document printing company.  We regularly produced 160,000 page
documents (20 copies).  With a suitable font Wikipedia's then 1 million
articles would have been a cinch.

On 17 June 2015 at 20:42, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 17 June 2015 at 20:39, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:

  I am surprised at how many people outside of my Wikipedia life have
  brought this to my attention today.
  I agree the Buy Now option is probably not the best bet here, but there
  is a tiny part of me that wouldn't mind getting a volume that includes an
  article I've done a lot of work on or one that includes some form of my
  username.  I can imagine the subjects of some of our biographical
  articles thinking the same way.  Who knows, this might actually sell...



 I find myself feeling much more positive towards this project than the
 likes of Books LLC.


 - d.

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Farewell

2015-06-19 Thread Richard Farmbrough
We shall miss you.

On 19 June 2015 at 09:30, Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com wrote:

 Goodbye Fabrice, and thank you for all your enthusiasm.
 It was very appreciated :-)
 Good luck!

 Aubrey

 On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Michael Jahn michael.j...@wikimedia.de
 wrote:

  May your next steps be joyful, thrilling and challenging. All the best to
  you, Fabrice!
  Michael
 
  2015-06-18 18:25 GMT+02:00 Fabrice Florin fflo...@wikimedia.org:
 
   Hello everyone,
  
   After three great years working at the foundation, the time has come to
   say goodbye.
  
   I will be leaving WMF at the end of June, to spend more time with my
   family, focus on personal art projects and consult part-time on worthy
   causes.
  
   I would like to thank all the community and team members I have had the
   pleasure to work with over the years. It has been an honor to serve our
   movement together — and to help our contributors share free knowledge
  with
   each other and the world.
  
   I’m particularly grateful to Katherine Maher and our WMF communications
   team for being such wonderful collaborators. I really enjoyed working
  with
   them to manage and edit the Wikimedia blog, help grow our team and
  publish
   some great stories together, to celebrate the heroes of our movement.
  
   Going forward, WMF's Juliet Barbara will manage the Wikimedia blog, in
   close collaboration with Ed Erhart. As many of you know, Ed is the
 former
   editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost and has now joined our team
 for
   the summer. I've worked with him for nearly a month now and find him
   uniquely qualified for this project. Starting today, please contact
 them
   directly with any questions about the blog (they are Cc:d on this
  message).
  
   After June 30, you can reach me at fabriceflo...@gmail.com — or
 follow
   me on Twitter ( @fabriceflorin ) or on my blog (
  http://fabriceflorin.com
   ).
  
   The last three years have been an incredible experience for me, and I
 am
   grateful for all that I have learned from so many of you. You’ve been
 an
   inspiration to me and I have many fond memories of our time together. I
   wish you all the best with the next chapter of the Wikimedia movement
 and
   can’t wait to see what you’ll come up with next.
  
   Best regards,
  
  
   Fabrice
  
   ___
  
   Fabrice Florin
   Movement Communications Manager
   Wikimedia Foundation
  
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF)
  
  
   ___
   Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
   Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 
 
 
  --
  Leiter Kommunikation
  Head of Communications
 
  Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
  Tel. (030) 219 158 260
 
  http://wikimedia.de http://www.wikimedia.de
 
  Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der
  Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
 
  Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
  Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
 unter
  der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
  Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editing Wikipedia for school community service hours

2015-04-15 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Content about businesses is potentially useful to people who need jobs.
Television shows *are* cultural topics.

I am uneasy about well intentioned attempts to define worthy and
unworthy content.

On 14 April 2015 at 02:28, Leigh Thelmadatter osama...@hotmail.com wrote:

 I agree that any community service type editing would have to be planned
 and done carefully as the type of work being done is everything. Obviously
 adding content about businesses and television shows would have no
 community impact, but documenting cultural topics, marginalized peoples,
 and the like very well could. Not to mention academic topics to the same
 communities as Wikipedia Zero serves. No sense students having free access
 if they information they need does not exist.
 Servicio social for Mexican universities also has an academic component,
 relating the service to their majors. María José has written a blog post,
 which is in the draft queue, about her experience which I hope gets
 published eventually.
 Leigh



  Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:03:50 -0400
  From: aleksey.bilo...@gmail.com
  To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  CC: wikimedia-casca...@lists.wikimedia.org;
 wikimediau...@lists.wikimedia.org
  Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editing Wikipedia for school community
 service hours
 
  If editing Wikipedia counted as community service my school ought to
 start
  handing me plaques.
 
  Alas, it does not, for a host of legitimate reasons as I see it, ranging
  from academic uncertainty about the usefulness of doing so when it comes
 to
  community impact, to the sheer difficulty of actually measuring. More
  meaningful (and, in the spirit of things, selfless) to volunteer at a
 local
  Wikipedia editing event then to sit back in an armchair and do the whole
  first-world-netizen-at-a-computer thing.
 
  On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   Hi all,
  
   Many schools in the United States encourage or require students to
 perform
   community service hours, such as by cleaning up parks, caring for the
   disabled, or tutoring younger students. Sometimes more specialized
   requirements apply, such as university schools of education or health
 which
   may require experience that is applicable to a student's desired
   coursework. Contributing to Wikimedia is one form of accepted community
   service in a multi-campus Mexican university, and the practice seems
 to be
   gaining momentum (see
  
 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/13/wiki-learning-edit-a-thon-mexico/).
  
   These community service programs are different from in-class
 assignments
   that require Wikipedia editing. Wikipedia can  benefit from both kinds
 of
   activities.
  
   I am wondering, have other Wikimedia affiliates had success with
   encouraging students to complete community service requirements by
   contributing to Wikimedia? I am thinking that here in Cascadia, we
 might
   encourage schools to allow this option, and other affiliates also might
   want to explore this possibility.
  
   Thanks,
   Pine
   ___
   Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
   Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcing: The Wikipedia Prize!

2015-03-30 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Moreover this may well be a breach of policy, TOS and even law.

On 31 March 2015 at 01:15, Oliver Keyes ironho...@gmail.com wrote:

 So, let me get this right:

 1. You announced that, as David puts it, noting anonymous IPs is the
 same as all-the-NSA-stuff-ever;
 2. People disputed it, but suggested you go form local consensus that
 this was problematic or participate in efforts to improve how we mask
 and handle data if that doesn't work for you;
 3. You decided that this was hard and a satirical breaching experiment
 would be more enjoyable?

 I'm...really not sure how this could possibly seem like a constructive
 way to go about solving for this problem, to you. Andrew Gray's advice
 is good advice, and still stands.

 On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote:
  So, you are offering a prize equivalent to US $2.50?  Not exactly an
  inspirational amount of money (though perhaps that is the point).
 
  -Robert Rohde
 
  On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Brian reflect...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  I'm sure many of you recall the Netflix Prize
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netflix_Prize. This is that, for
 Wikipedia!
 
  Although the initial goal of the Netflix Prize was to design a
  collaborative filtering algorithm, it became notorious when the data was
  used to de-anonymize Netflix users. Researchers proved that given just a
  user's movie ratings on one site, you can plug those ratings into
 another
  site, such as the IMDB. You can then take that information, and with
 some
  Google searches and optionally a bit of cash (for websites that sell
 user
  information, including, in some cases, their SSN) figure out who they
 are.
  You could even drive up to their house and take a selfie with them, or
  follow them to work and meet their boss and tell them about their views
 on
  the topics they were editing.
 
  Here, we'll cut straight to the privacy chase. Using just the full
 history
  dump of the English Wikipedia, excluding edits from any logged-in users,
  identify five people. You must confirm their identities with them, and
  privately prove to me that you've done this. I will then nominate you as
  the winner and send you one million Satoshis (the smallest unit of
 Bitcoin,
  times 1 million), in addition to updating this thread.
 
  I suspect this challenge will be very easy for anyone who is determined.
  Indeed, even if MediaWiki no longer displayed IP addresses, there would
  still be enough information to identify people. Completely getting rid
 of
  the edit history would largely solve the problem. In the mean time, this
  Prize will serve as a reminder that when Wikipedia says Your IP address
  will be publicly visible if you make any edits. what they mean is,
 People
  will probably be able to figure out where you live and embarrass you.
 
  An extra million Satoshis for each NSA employee that you identify. A
 full
  bitcoin if you take a selfie with them.
 
  Let the games begin!
 
  Brian Mingus
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who are the nicest people on our projects ?

2015-02-05 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Who was most thanked?

On 5 February 2015 at 15:47, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi,

 After reading an interesting related discussion on GenderGap, I have
 queried the top 10 users of the thanks feature last month, on both the
 English Wikipedia and Commons. Snapshot image attached and report link
 below.

 Perhaps someone might think of a suitable barnstar and award these
 folks for being nice? :-)

 Link:
 http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:F%C3%A6/sandboxoldid=149050523

 P.S. This is a long query to run, taking 20 to 30 minutes due to the
 nature of the logging tables. However if someone wanted to make a
 monthly summary on-wiki somewhere, part of an active be nice
 campaign, I would be happy to set up an automated monthly report (if
 someone discovers this is already reported somewhere, that's cool we
 can use that).

 Fae
 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open Letter to Lila (Harassment Policy)

2015-02-02 Thread Richard Farmbrough
It is true that our Arbitrators have not always behaved as we would wish,
and the cases that Trillium brings are are especially egregious, those
familiar with the the Arbcom leaks or indeed who have followed the actions
of the Committee, or dealt with individual Arbitrators on the English
Wikipedia, will be aware of many errors and abuses.  (They will also be
aware that the majority of Arbitrators have been assets to the community
the majority of the time.)

However the fact that a proportion, even if it were a significant
proportion, of the committee have feet of clay, does not mean that they are
not a useful collective resource to consult over harassment issues.

What we should take form the issues over the years is that it is worth
looking at ways to improve the governance structure.  Splitting check-user
form arbitration is one possible means.  Making checkuser more transparent
is another.  And real name accountability is a third.  Note that one
Arbitrator resigned (and pretty much left the project too) rather than
provide the WMF with his real name.

On 2 February 2015 at 15:12, Trillium Corsage trillium2...@yandex.com
wrote:

 Nathan, there is no context that could possibly justify those evidenced
 incidents of harassment and stalking. There is no excuse. The information
 is out there for anyone who wants to read about them, but it's wrong to
 attempt to rationalize them in a sea of details and that's why I didn't do
 it.

 Trillium Corsage

 PS: yes, I identify as male (he, his etc.).

 02.02.2015, 15:03, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
  I wasted the few minutes necessary to read Trillium's blog post, and I
  don't recommend anyone else make that same mistake. He's taken a few
  incidents in a 7 year period, presented them utterly without the totally
  necessary context, and ignored any evidence that might make it clear how
  silly and ignorant his (or her) position is.
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open Letter to Lila (Harassment Policy)

2015-02-02 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Because the Arbitration Committee does have experience dealing with
harassment.  Not many projects have such a body dedicated to dealing with
conflict.  You are of course right that a general consultation should be
made, and I'm sure if there are other bodies you can point to the WMF would
love to consult with them too.

On 2 February 2015 at 18:04, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com
wrote:

 If the WMF is consulting any specific entity of an individual Wikimedia
 project out of 800 for a crosswiki matter, that's ridiculous, period. I
 don't see why bother looking into the specific merits of the entity in
 question, or the allegations about them.

 Nemo


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
 wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's fix templates

2014-10-10 Thread Richard Farmbrough
I have a tool to migrate templates. If anyone has a particular wiki that
needs templates migrating on an as needed basis, please let me know and I
will be happy to help.

On 10 October 2014 02:57, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote:

 Lua makes editing templates for most users impossible. Perhaps the English
 community has enough users to handle all edit requests for Lua templates,
 most smaller wikis have too less users to do that. It is not just creating
 a Lua template, but also that the local communities on various wikis need
 to be able to maintain those templates when an update is needed or a
 changed is wished for. Depending on other projects is a bad scenario which
 is not an acceptable solution.

 I also do not see why it is considered easier... it is actually not easier.
 The general rule which is applied for the wikis I am active is that almost
 all templates should be editable by the majority of the community and we
 should not rely on a small number of users with programming skills. And
 learning an extra method for editing templates is the other way round,
 which absolutely does not make editing templates easier but creates an
 extra doorstep for users to do simple updates.

 Another general rule applied is KISS: if we can make it simple such is
 recommended over a complex template with little or no extra functionality.
 With a complex template, the first question to be asked is if a complex
 template is really needed. In most cases it is not. Problem solved.

 Romaine


 2014-10-10 1:40 GMT+02:00 Matthew Flaschen mflasc...@wikimedia.org:

  On 09/02/2014 03:27 PM, pi zero wrote:
 
  The templates are extremely complicated in implementation, which is
  irrelevant.  If templates were rejected based on extremely complicated
  implementation, that would rule out essentially everything that uses
  Scribuntu under the hood.
 
 
  I don't agree with this.  Scribunto is a new language to learn (Lua), but
  that language is far easier for complicated work than parser functions
 are
  for complicated work.
 
  Matt Flaschen
 
 
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
  wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps regarding WMF-community disputes about deployments

2014-09-01 Thread Richard Farmbrough
What is irritating about the ACTRIAL scenario, was that it was a well
defined (6 month) test.

It might have worked, it might not have worked.  But we would have known.
We would have had solid comparators.

Most of what we do (WMF and community) has no control to establish whether
it works.

To be clear, I am against preventing article creation by IPs let alone
non-autoconfirmed users. But this trial might well have provided compelling
evidence one way or the other.

The dismissal as a we know better was a bad thing, but not uncommon on
Bugzilla.




On 2 September 2014 01:06, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote:

 I hope that's not the feature Philippe meant, but maybe. For my clients and
 students I think it's generally caused more confusion than it's solved,
 since now they have an additional layer of bureaucracy to navigate (AFC).
 Is there any data suggesting that's been a net improvement for new users?

 Pete
 On Sep 1, 2014 4:38 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:

  Wasn't the creation of the DRAFT namespace at least in part a response to
  concerns raised at ACTRIAL, in particular new, poorly developed articles
  showing up in mainspace?
 
  Risker/Anne
 
 
  On 1 September 2014 19:08, Joe Decker joedec...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   This, to the best of my knowledge, represents the entirety of the WMF's
   response to ACTRIAL.  To the extent that there was additional feedback
   given, it was not given at WP:ACTRIAL, nor any other venue I am aware
 of.
  
   https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30208
  
   --Joe
  
  
   On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  
That's the issue I cited above. You haven't heard more complaints,
   because
the complaint was pointless the first time and took a massive effort
 to
produce.
   
The underlying issue isn't fixed. We're still drowning in crap and
 spam
from people who never have the slightest intent of editing helpfully,
  and
those who are newbies who genuinely want to help but need guidance
 get
caught in the crossfire aimed at the vandals and spammers. It is
   relatively
rare that when a genuinely new editor's first edit is a creation, it
 is
   the
creation of an appropriate article on a workable subject, and that's
normally more by dumb luck than them having actual knowledge that
 they
should do it.
   
So, consider that a complaint. The proposed fix didn't work, and most
people at the time didn't figure it would work, but it was clearly
 the
   best
we were going to get.
   
   
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Philippe Beaudette 
pbeaude...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:
   



  On Sep 1, 2014, at 8:45 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com
  wrote:
 
  That's contradicted by, among other things, ACTRIAL as mentioned
   above.
 The
  en.wp community came to a clear consensus for a major change, and
  the
WMF
  shrugged and said Nah, rather not.

 That's... Not exactly what I remember happening there. What I
  remember
was
 that a pretty good number (~500) of enwiki community members came
together
 and agreed on a problem, and one plan for how to  fix it and asked
  the
WMF
 to implement it. The WMF evaluated it, and saw a threat to a basic
project
 value. WMF then asked what's the problem you're actually trying to
 solve?, and proposed and built a set of tools to directly address
  that
 problem without compromising the core value of openness. And it
 seems
   to
 have worked out pretty well because I haven't heard a ton of
  complaints
 about that problem since.

 __
 Philippe Beaudette
 Director, Community Advocacy
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe:
  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
 ?subject=unsubscribe

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
   
  
  
  
   --
   Joe Decker
   www.joedecker.net
   ___
   Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
   Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
  
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps regarding WMF-community disputes about deployments

2014-08-31 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Legal position:

I have seen it claimed by legal and repeated here by Erik that the
reasonableness criteria means that we do not have to worry about the
CCBYSA-3.0 clause that says all copyright holders need equal attribution.
This is simply not so:

The credit required by this Section 4(c) may be implemented *in any
reasonable manner; provided, however, that *in the case of a Adaptation or
Collection,* at a minimum such credit will appear*, if a credit for all
contributing authors of the Adaptation or Collection appears, then as part
of these credits and* in a manner at least as prominent as the credits for
the other contributing authors*.

There is no wriggle room here. * provided however that* means the following
is compulsory, and not subject to the lenience of the previous phraseology.




On 31 August 2014 16:59, Yann Forget yan...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi all,

 Thank you Erik for your mail. It shows that the WMF is willing to
 discuss rather than to impose its solution.

 I am really shocked that the dispute reaches that level of
 confrontation, and although some community members have a hard stance,
 this is largely due to WMF actions, specially the creation of the
 superprotect right. This is the worst possible step the WMF could
 make to find a solution for this issue.

 Initially I was quite neutral about the MediaWiever, but I became
 increasingly skeptical. IMO it is hardly a priority, even for readers.
 Even if I am a long term contributor of Wikimedia projects, I am also
 a heavy reader of Wikipedia. I think that if a feature is refused in
 masse for the most active contributors, there is something wrong
 either in the feature itself, or in the way it is proposed to the
 projects. The WMF can certainly bring useful new additions in term of
 software development, but the implementation has to be done in a
 partnership with volunteer contributors. I cannot understand that the
 WMF in spite of its multi-million dollars budget is not able to
 convince volunteer contributors that the new feature is beneficial to
 the projects, either because it is technically very good, or that even
 with some shortcomings, it would improve the reading experience.

 I am quite willing to test beta software, and I think there is no
 urgency to impose the MediaWiever now to everybody. I could be done
 after some time, when all issues have been sorted out. In term of
 media management, the most urgent and important thing is to fix the
 UploadWizard. Viewing images with Mediawiki may not be optimal, but it
 is not broken. The UploadWizard is broken.

 Regards,

 Yann

 2014-08-20 0:42 GMT+05:30 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
  Hi folks,
 
  This is a response to Martin's note here:
 
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-August/073936.html
 
  .. and also a more general update on the next steps regarding disputes
  about deployments. As you may have seen, Lila has also posted an
  update to her talk page, here:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LilaTretikov#Working_Together
 
  I want to use this opportunity to respond to Martin's and other
  people's criticisms, and to talk about next steps from WMF’s
  perspective following discussions with Lila and the team. I’m also
  sending a copy of this note to all the stewards, to better involve
  them in the process going forward.
 
  I am -- genuinely -- sorry that this escalation occurred. We would
  have preferred to avoid it.
 
  I would like to recap how we find ourselves in this situation: As
  early as July, we stated that the Wikimedia Foundation reserves the
  right to determine the final configuration of the MediaViewer feature,
  and we explicitly included MediaWiki: namespace hacks in that
  statement. [1] When an admin implemented a hack to disable
  MediaViewer, another local admin reverted the edit. The original admin
  reinstated it. We then reverted it with a clear warning that we may
  limit editability of the page. [2] The original admin reinstated the
  hack. This is when we protected the page.
 
  Because all admins have equal access to the MediaWiki: namespace,
  short of desysopping, there are few mechanisms to actually prevent
  edit wars about the user experience for millions of readers.
  Desysopping actions could have gotten just as messy -- and we felt
  that waiting for a better hack to come along (the likeliest eventual
  outcome of doing nothing) or disabling the feature ourselves would not
  be any better, either from a process or outcome standpoint.
 
  Our processes clearly need to be improved to avoid these situations in
  the future. We recognize that simply rejecting a community request
  rather than resolving a conflict together is not the right answer.
  We’ve been listening to feedback, and we’ve come to the following
  conclusions:
 
  - We intend to undertake a review of our present processes immediately
  and propose a new approach that allows for feedback at more critical
  and relevant junctures in 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

2014-08-26 Thread Richard Farmbrough
I have coincidentally raised the question of fair-use images for living
people at the Gender Gap Taskforce talk page. Perhaps this is something we
shoudl take to the policy talk page?


On 26 August 2014 14:24, Tim Davenport shoehu...@gmail.com wrote:

 David Goodman has this exactly right — new volunteers (as opposed to casual
 contributors) aren't made with templates of cookies or beer, they are
 generally made one at a time, with personal attention and personal
 assistance. Teahouse is one of the best ideas of the last five years, being
 a place where newcomers can go to ask specific questions. Mentoring
 programs is another very correct step.

 I'm currently working with a buddy who is getting into it. Wiki markup gunk
 isn't a big problem for him; he's about 40 years old and has been around
 html enough that it doesn't put him off. Footnoting he initially found
 difficult, but I taught him how to do it long form rather than using layout
 clogging templates, so that might have added an hour or two to the learning
 curve. Still: not that difficult and he already has the knack of it — and
 once you learn that, it's all very simple.

 I'm going to write him a couple thousand word email on linking today.
 That's all pretty self-evident.

 We had lunch yesterday and I explained to him the way that some topics
 which interest him (alternative medicine) are going to be battleground
 areas in which he really must be a master of NPOV; while other interests,
 relating to popular culture and sports, are less intense, with rawer and
 worse articles standing that need Tender Loving Care.

 He's enthusiastic about WP, and there is absolutely no substitute for that.
 That is the thing that is missing in college students doing class projects.
 My experience thus far with them is that they dive in at the 11th hour, do
 minimally decent work necessary to complete the assignment, ask zero
 questions, and then vanish.

 Serious, longterm editors are made one at a time, I think. It starts with
 personal attention. It requires someone to explain editing techniques and
 (just as importantly) WP culture and policies and tour-guiding them through
 all the policy pages and various backstage aspects of WP.

 It also involves something we have totally ignored so far: making sure they
 have something to do: assigning projects.You like this band? Dig up more
 sources, flesh it out. Oh, your grandpa was a pro athlete and already has a
 page? Dig up some news stories on his career... Write about his
 teammates... Hey, this article on the NFL championship game he played in is
 pretty terrible, why not see if you can make it better?

 Another unspoken problem is photo rights, which is (1) confusing to start
 with; (2) subject to one of the worst decisions ever, the choice to use
 free files rather than to make use of American fair use legal doctrine; (3)
 populated by anal retentive volunteers who delete first and ask questions
 never, engage only with templates, work too fast, and who in many cases I
 suspect take malicious joy in their work. I know that that was the aspect
 of WP that alienated me the worst as a newcomer. It still does.

 So, WMF sorts: remember that this is a slow process and that there are no
 magical software solutions. Creating new Very Active Editors takes
 motivated candidates and volunteers willing to take newcomers under their
 wings.

 Tim Davenport
 Corvallis, OR
 Carrite on WP /// Randy from Boise on WPO


 DAVID GOOMAN WROTE:
 Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method
 of personally communicating with new editors who seem promising
 and encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in
 this is personally. It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove
 messages, and certainly not with anything that looks like a template.
 Template welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or
 web personalizedadvertisements.  What works is to show that you actually
 read and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to
 write something specific.
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Access by Wikimedia volunteers to WMF records about them

2014-08-24 Thread Richard Farmbrough
But if the entity refuses to answer, one has limited recourse, especially
if that entity is American, or trans-Atlantic.


On 24 August 2014 16:50, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:

 If you don't know of a policy which gives you the right to ask
 something, why ask that something?
 Instead, ask something you know you have the right to ask; for instance,
 EU citizens have the right, by privacy law, to ask what PII an entity
 has about them.

 Nemo

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New movement org?

2014-08-23 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Note that while it *is* a trademark issue, it isn't *just* a trademark
issue.


On 21 August 2014 18:44, Gregory Varnum gregory.var...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thank you Richard for bringing this to everyone's attention.

 So folks know, WMF Legal and the Affiliations Committee are investigating
 and will be reaching out to the group soon.

 Thanks!
 -greg aka varnent
 Wikimedia Affiliations Committee Vice Chair


 On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Richard Symonds 
 richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:

  Thanks all!
 
  I have passed this over to WMF legal to deal with as it's a trademark
  issue.
 
  Richard Symonds
  Wikimedia UK
  0207 065 0992
 
  Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
  Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
  Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A
 4LT.
  United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
  movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
  operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
 
  *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
  over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
 
 
  On 21 August 2014 17:31, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   On 21 August 2014 12:21, James Forrester jdforres...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  
On 21 August 2014 09:13, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
   
 Hi Richard, any links to where you found this information?

   
   
​The ever-excellent OpenCorporates has its entry:
   
https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_mi/71656Y
   
… leading to the official US state of Michigan's entry:
   
http://www.dleg.state.mi.us/bcs_corp/dt_corp.asp?id_nbr=71656Y
   
No information about the officers, sadly, just a filing office.
   
   
   Incorporation documents here:
  
  
 
 http://www.dleg.state.mi.us/bcs_corp/image.asp?FILE_TYPE=ELFFILE_NAME=D201408\2014224\E0091608.TIF
  
   President:  Scott Perry
   Vice President:  Ann Perry
   Secretary:  Danielle Lewis
  
   Someone else can figure out how to copy/paste.
  
   Risker/Anne
   ___
   Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
   Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
  
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Coming to a wiki near you

2014-08-18 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Lets straighten a few things out

1. Of course I don't think that bug counting is an accurate metric - and we
are all aware that Bugzilla contains other items.  Nonetheless to pretend
that everything is rosy with MV is facile.

2. Specifically it appears that MV breaks CC-BY-SA-3.0.  Details on
Bugzilla.

3. But this is not really about MV.  It is about working with the
community.  The mission statement for the Foundation says encourage and
empower not command and control.  There are good reasons for this, which
have been touched on in various places.

4. A culture change is needed, and there is little point in debating
specifics (except to add them to a list of what not to do) unless the
Foundation accepts that this needs to happen.

5. Moreover engaging in personalities within the community do not move
things forward, indeed they devalue the overall debate.


On 18 August 2014 13:55, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 18 August 2014 03:53, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote:

  Risker, some replies below:
 
  snip


  As I stated in my response, although the WMF failed to predict that this
 would be a hot issue, I predicted it clearly in February, and so did
 another longtime community member. (If anybody wants to see that other
 piece, let me know -- I now have permission to share it, actually an IRC
 log, not an email.)
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:
 LilaTretikovdiff=9512960oldid=9512915

 (and the reference link:
 https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?diff=907392
 )

 Wow, Pete.  You predict something will be rejected by the community, and
 identify a list of concerns.  Several months later, you apply the code that
 applies a community rejection.  This brings the term self-fulfilling
 prophecy to a whole new level.  Just wow.

 Risker/Anne
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Coming to a wiki near you

2014-08-17 Thread Richard Farmbrough
And that is a common community complaint, games communities, social
communities, and content communities.

They all say fix the bugs before working on new stuff.  Developers prefer
working on new stuff, managers prefer working on new stuff. Where's the
kudos from making things bug-free?  But that is what is needed.


On 17 August 2014 13:48, Comet styles cometsty...@gmail.com wrote:

 yes but mediawiki is a software, not an add-on or as the kids say
 these days, an App which is what Media Viewer is. Enforcing
 something with more than a 100 bugs (and counting) is indeed not a
 very super idea..Fix the bugs or atleast half of them and maybe then
 try enforcing them (as WMF ignores community decisions)..

 On 8/17/14, Chad Horohoe choro...@wikimedia.org wrote:
  On Aug 17, 2014 6:49 AM, Richard Farmbrough rich...@farmbrough.co.uk
  wrote:
 
  There are 105 bugs open for Media Viewer.  To my mind that is not a
  product
  that is ready to be delivered to 500,000,000 users, delivering  52.5
  billion bugs!  (And that's just the ones we know about!)
 
 
  MediaWiki itself has 4893 open bugs. Guess we need to start over so we
 can
  write bug-free software.
 
  Except that's not how it works, absolute bug counts are a pretty useless
  metric.
 
  -Chad
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 --
 Cometstyles

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Coming to a wiki near you

2014-08-16 Thread Richard Farmbrough
There are 105 bugs open for Media Viewer.  To my mind that is not a product
that is ready to be delivered to 500,000,000 users, delivering  52.5
billion bugs!  (And that's just the ones we know about!)

But even if it was, the fact  that a project community has asked for it to
be opt-in should be respected by the developers.  The idea that  software
developers control the roll-out of their own software is no way to develop
software  User acceptance testing was invented, what, 50 or 60 years ago?


On 15 August 2014 14:45, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 On 15 August 2014 06:08, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Developing for mobile is nice and should continue, but desktop is far
 from
  dead. I don't even try to edit from mobile; I want my real keyboard and
  monitor, not the crappy on screen one and 3 display.
 

 This is a false dilemma. The WMF does not have any plans to stop developing
 desktop features. On the contrary, the VisualEditor team recently changed
 scope to be the Editing team in part so that the scope of their team also
 included maintaining the wikitext editor on desktop.

 Dan

 --
 Dan Garry
 Associate Product Manager, Mobile Apps
 Wikimedia Foundation
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Clarification by Lila Tretikov about MediaViewer

2014-08-14 Thread Richard Farmbrough
The community too is asking for kindness and consideration.  Riding
roughshod over community consensus does not equate to kindness, or even
wisdom, unless it it that of Niccolò Machiavelli!

The Mission Statement of the Foundation says


*The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage people
around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free
license https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:free_content or in the public
domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.*
If the WMF would remember the word empower we would not get these
issues.   The Foundation needs to empower the community to disseminate
content not dictate to the community how content will be disseminated.

All the best,  Rich Farmbrough.


On 13 August 2014 13:01, Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonew...@gmail.com wrote:

 Forwarding on request.

 --
 Thehelpfulone
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone

 Begin forwarded message:

  From: Ad Huikeshoven a...@wikimedia.nl
  Date: 13 August 2014 12:40:14 BST
  To: wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
  Subject: Clarification by Lila Tretikov about MediaViewer
 
  Dear fellow Wikipedians and Wikimedians,
 
  Your work in creating the awesome thing Wikipedia is very much
 appreciated and you're all recognized for contributing towards it's
 success. Last weekend I have been to Wikimania. I really enjoyed the
 presentation by Fabrice Florin about A Culture of Kindness [1]. One of the
 slide contains a picture of Jimmy Wales holding a sheet of paper on which
 he has written 'be kind to everyone, including the annoying ones'.
 
  There have been multiple threads on this list with many postings about
 actions on the German Wikipedia with respect to MediaViewer. On meta Lila
 Tretikov has posted several remarks including an additional clarification
 [2], which I copy below:
 
  quote
  * Our overall communication, design, prioritization, testing, roll-out
 mechanisms and general product development practices are insufficient and
 must be brought on-par with our user’s expectations. We are not planning
 any new major deployments until some of those basic improvements are put
 into place. This will be done in the open; it is fundamental and urgent.
 I've touched on it at Wikimania.
  * We are not removing MV.  It has been in production for months. Its
 removal will cause more problems and confusion for our users.  We will hold
 ourselves accountable to getting it to the level of quality that is
 expected of the top site.
  * We are working to post next steps to clarify development and
 deployment process including rights and responsibilities; you can expect
 more information in coming days.
  * I encourage you to help us improve our process as a whole as well as
 this specific feature by offering your time, advice, and collaboration. We
 will be engaging you on it. Please refrain from making unassisted changes
 to  the feature’s configuration.
  /quote
 
  What Fabrice and Jimmy ask for is to be kind. What I would like to
 express is that many of the postings about MediaViewer do annoy me, and
 some are very annoying. What I do ask of my fellow Wikipedians is to
 continue to contribute to Wikipedia in a kind way, to pay attention to what
 Lila has posted on meta and which I copied above.
 
  Some of you might be curious to learn to know the ideas of Lila. She
 made a presentation at Wikimania, which can be viewed on line [3]. Please
 collaborate in the development of processes in a kind way. Thank you.
  ---
  [1]
 https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/A_Culture_of_Kindness
  [2]
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALilaTretikovdiff=9501584oldid=9501543
  [3] http://new.livestream.com/wikimania/saturday2014
  --
  Ad Huikeshoven
 
  Bestuurslid / Board member Wikimedia Nederland
  Internationaal / International Affairs
  Educatieprogramma / Education Program
 
  tel.(+31) (0)70 3608510
  mob. (+31) (0)6 40293574
 
  Steun vrije kennis! Kijk op wikimedia.nl
  Postadres:  Bezoekadres:
  Postbus 167Mariaplaats 3
  3500 AD  Utrecht Utrecht
 
  ABNAMRO NL33 ABNA 0497164833 - Kamer van Koophandel 17189036
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Unacceptable -- CheckUser abuse gone uninvestigated

2014-08-03 Thread Richard Farmbrough
I have to say that there is an unnecessary lack of transparency which seems
to get worse.  In or around May 2012 I emailed the audit committee on EN:WP
to ask about checkuser run on my account and got a polite and informative
reply.   In or around May 2014 an identically worded query got a polite
refusal.

Note, incidentally that those who run checkuser are often working from the
UK, and are quite likely under a legal obligation make this information
available.


On 3 August 2014 03:15, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
 ..
  I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that the logs are
 maintained
  indefinitely but the data is retained for only 3 months (i.e. the results
  of the check that is recorded in the log).

 The checkuser log are kept indefinitely, but it only records what
 usernames/IPs that were checked (i.e. the query), and the reason given
 by the checkuser for the check.

 It does not record the results of the query.

 That said, the sequence of checks run by a CU often creates a
 permanent record in the private CU log of an persons likely IP
 addresses.  e.g. the log may contain a check on an account, with a
 reason given, followed by checks on IPs, with the same reason logged.

 --
 John Vandenberg

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] simple and effective creation process for chapters

2014-05-03 Thread Richard Farmbrough
I am involved with a charity that sets up regional charities.  We have a 
nominally clean procedure which can set up a charity in a few days.  
However a constantly changing legislative and regulatory environment can 
send the whole system back to square one.


When we are dealing with a new legislative and regulatory environment 
for each chapter, the plan for a cookie-cutter approach is likely to 
founder at the first hurdle.   Moreover cultural and demographic 
differences are even more diversifying.


Regulatory constraints limit the sense in which a chapter, if it is to 
benefit from charitable, non-profit or tax exempt status, can be a 
membership organisation.


On the other hand a simple association may meet most of the needs of a 
chapter, and they should not be weighed down with excess regulatory 
burden if that is all they need.


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimania-l] git.wikimedia.org dead due to wikimania ; )

2013-08-12 Thread Richard Farmbrough
I maintained 24/7 support with a team of 6. WMF has 150 staff and does 
not have weekend support.  The tail is wagging the dog.



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Visual Editor temporary opt-out

2013-08-06 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Apparently important.  I am aware, as probably everyone is, that this is 
the first most obvious step to make article editing more accessible, and 
address certain inclusiveness goals.  I am also aware that there is no 
data to support the theory that a visual editor means more inclusive 
editing, let alone that it will result in better content.


I will simply add a couple of observations.

The learning curve for wikitext is one of the shallowest of any 
application.  Press edit, type in the box and press save.  If you can 
type and press edit and save (the latter two of which /are/ HMI issues 
IMHO) you can edit Wikimedia projects.


Secondly, and anecdotally, most full functioned word-processors have a 
plethora of functions that are usually only known about by the same 
tech-savvy  group that we currently believe are at home with wiki-text.


Thirdly I vividly remember my first editing experiences - I did not 
think I would /ever /be touching stuff like infoboxes and categories, 
but they made no real obstacle to editing.  (The keyboard only method of 
formatting text took seconds to understand, and saves a huge amount of 
time.)


I would not be surprised if the /choice/ of editor turns out to be the 
reason that editing has fallen off more rather than the VE itself.


On 06/08/2013 08:04, MZMcBride wrote:
I cannot and will not blame the Wikimedia Foundation for working on 
this project. It's an important project

...
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An idea that may improve Wikipedia's fundraising

2013-08-06 Thread Richard Farmbrough
enwiki-20130708-pages-articles.xml.bz2 
http://dumps.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20130708/enwiki-20130708-pages-articles.xml.bz2 
9.3 GB - a double sided single layer  DVD (9.4gb).  The images would be 
more challenging.


On 06/08/2013 17:52, Kevin Wayne Williams wrote:
More like a complete set of Wikipedia Blu-Rays. I forget the actual 
byte count of Wikipedia these days, but it's well over anything you 
would want to try to store on DVDs.


KWW


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why the WP will never be a real encyclopaedia

2013-08-03 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Rui (and list) there is a myth about articles that are sacrosanct - 
which is not to say that there aren't such articles, though the examples 
you gave don't stand up to much scrutiny.  It would be useful to conduct 
some research on the whole corpus to evaluate this hypothesis and give 
some upper and lower bounds for  the populaiton, and to establish some 
sample lists for qualitative examination.


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

2013-06-05 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Trademark protection has benefits for both parties, but primarily the 
consumer.


There is little point protecting our neutrality, for example, if our 
identity can be hijacked to make vested recommendations.



On 05/06/2013 15:58, Mathieu Stumpf wrote:

Le 2013-06-04 19:25, George Herbert a écrit :

On Jun 4, 2013, at 2:24 AM, Mathieu Stumpf

etc...

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices)

2013-01-14 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Yes there is some data on templating in a research paper somewhere, and 
some more on a/b template runs. But the solution is not trivial.  I have 
stuck up for a few editors who appear to be children, suggesting that we 
treat them a little more gently, only to be told that they are in fact 
trolls, pretending to be children, pretending to create obvious socks...


When I joined Wikipedia I was constantly being surprised (and delighted) 
by the unwillingness to block, the willingness to unblock, the IAR ethos 
when something did something obviously good that broke a rule.  I get 
the feeling that many admins still have the same /attitude/ they are 
just to weary to AGF.  UNblock is pretty much always standard offer or 
nothing - even people who say  I see what I did was wrong but.. end 
up with their talk page access removed, or giving up.  This is not about 
the vandalism only accounts, this is people who do something stupid, and 
something in good faith, or make a mistake.  They may well not be ready 
to edit for a few years, but we are building up a resentment about 
Wikipedia that is visible in every comments section of every article 
about Wikipedia I tired to edit once and it got reverted.   Of course 
there will always be some who won't engage with discussion, but 
fundamentally we should be able to engage these people, rather than 
alienate them.


On 03/01/2013 10:01, Thomas Morton wrote:
It might help; often it is surprising how statistical analysis can 
help narrow the focus of such efforts. For example; it is taken as a 
given that incivility drives away new users, but do we have hard 
statistical evidence to back that up? And if that is a true situation, 
can we identify specifically what uncivil things are driving the most 
editors away (rudeness, templating, etc.). Although please lets do it 
without words like big data, which makes me squirm :P Tom 


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

2013-01-14 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Yes, of course - why didn't we think of that?  Actually the lack of 
rules and lack of punishments means (meant) it was bloody hard to game 
the  system.  Now we have a calcified set of rules and an oligarchy, 
passive-aggressives have a field day.  Rules-lawyers abound, polite 
requests to the oligarchy are met with insults about mind-set and 
other newspeak comments. Meanwhile the 99% of editors that just want to 
edit and the 95% of admins that just want to help the project are 
stymied at every turn, scared to get involved in the processes.  A 
number of years ago the oligarchy destroyed hope (Esperanza) - now the 
Wikiquette noticeboard has gone.  Power is increasingly in fewer and 
fewer hands, a significant number of whom have, over the years, and 
indeed recently, abused that power.


The solution for social problems is socialisation.  We have some great 
exponents of that art in Dennis Brown, Worm That Turned and several 
others.  For those that won't be socialised, the solution is ostracism - 
or blocking as it is known.  Provided this is used with caution on 
community members, and with no longer duration than necessary it is a 
good solution.


On 04/01/2013 06:27, Tim Starling wrote:
The solution for social problems is to have rules and a means to 
punish people who break them.



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

2013-01-14 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Of course any effort to make article source more readable meets with 
opposition - in the case of references in particular.  And not only from 
those who cite CITEVAR legitimately, but from at least one admin who 
will block for putting references in numerical order.  These are the 
sorts of things which would not have lasted long in (admittedly slightly 
mythical) Good Old Days


On 04/01/2013 15:48, David Gerard wrote:
I spent idle time in the holiday week working on [[:en:OpenOffice]]. 
Wikitext is just awful these days, particularly in an article like 
that where every assertion needs and has a cite. Anyone who thinks 
wikitext is just fine for the job, I urge you to click edit and 
contemplate fixing the guacamole you see before you. Sure hope the 
visual editor makes managing references on an article like that 
easier. - d. ___ 
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

2012-09-24 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Free speech in the US is, I believe, generally considered to exclude 
both fighting words and shouting fire in a crowded theatre.


On 20/09/2012 04:56, Fred Bauder wrote:
I think any laws should be couched in terms of damaging foreign 
relations or inciting to riot. I'm not sure they would be 
unconstitutional even in the United States. When the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff is reduced to begging a fundamentalist preacher 
in Florida to cool it, something is out of whack. Fred 
___ Wikimedia-l mailing 
list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikitech-l] #switch limits

2012-09-24 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Attempts to de-switch templates are resisted at every turn by folk who 
have CS 101. :-P


On 21/09/2012 05:14, Steven Walling wrote:

Template authors on any and every wiki, this one's for you. ;)

-- Forwarded message --
From: Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org
Date: Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:07 PM
Subject: [Wikitech-l] #switch limits
To: wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org


Over the last week, we have noticed very heavy apache memory usage on
the main Wikimedia cluster. In some cases, high memory usage resulted
in heavy swapping and site-wide performance issues.

After some analysis, we've identified the main cause of this high
memory usage to be geographical data (données) templates on the
French Wikipedia, and to a lesser extent, the same data templates
copied to other wikis for use on articles about places in Europe.

Here is an example of a problematic template:


https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mod%C3%A8le:Donn%C3%A9es_PyrF1-2009action=edit
That template alone uses 47MB for 37000 #switch cases, and one article
used about 15 similarly sized templates.

The simplest solution to this problem is for the few Wikipedians
involved to stop doing what they are doing, and to remove the template
invocations which have already been introduced. Antoine Musso has
raised the issue on the French Wikipedia's Bistro and some of the
worst cases have already been fixed.

To protect site stability, I've introduced a new preprocessor
complexity limit called the preprocessor generated node count, which
is incremented by about 6 for each #switch case. When the limit is
exceeded, an exception is thrown, preventing the page from being saved
or viewed.

The limit is currently 4 million (~667,000 #switch cases), and it will
soon be reduced to 1.5 million (~250,000 #switch cases). That's a
compromise which allows most of the existing geographical pages to
keep working, but still allows a memory usage of about 230MB.

At some point, we would like to patch PHP upstream to cause memory for
DOM XML trees to be allocated from the PHP request pool, instead of
with malloc(). But to deploy that, we would need to reduce the limit
to the point where the template DOM cache can easily fit in the PHP
memory limit of 128MB.

In the short term, we will be working with the template editors to
ensure that all articles can be viewed with a limit of 1.5 million.
That's not a very viable solution in the long term, so I'd also like
to introduce save-time warnings and tracking categories for pages
which use more than, say, 50% of the limit, to encourage authors to
fix articles without being directly prompted by WMF staff members.

At some point in the future, you may be able to put this kind of
geographical data in Wikidata. Please, template authors, wait
patiently, don't implement your own version of Wikidata using wikitext
templates.

-- Tim Starling



___
Wikitech-l mailing list
wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such

2012-08-16 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Apart from using a vandalized version of [[Pyramid]] and a graphically 
horrendous capital I, there are some nice elements in a generally good 
layout.


The key improvement needed (and WAP has made this evident to more 
people) is to stop wasting real estate on more and more nested top bars 
and side bars.  Even with a modern 15.2 inch laptop many pages have 
threir contents squeezed enough by the OS, browser and MW bars that 
there is little room left for infoboxes, TOCs, pictures, tables  and 
navboxes.


There is also a desire to visualise that may be applied where it is 
not needed.   We do not need the interface to show us the relation 
between the number of articles on arts and the number of articles on 
humanities - this is not necessarily a useful statistic for researchers, 
and even less so for readers.




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l